THE GREAT PYRAMID OF GIZA

Three Reflections on the construction of the Great Pyramid

A "colossal” building " The Anphytheatrum Flavium, was built in about 8 years (72 AD - 80 AD) using
technologies more than 2500 years more advanced than the Egyptians had had during the construction of the
Great Pyramid The Romans had the wheel, the pulley, iron and other connected levers and made the
maximum use of Roman engineering, to complete it in the shortest possible time.
Below, two satellite photos compare the two structures scaled proportionately:

Note the pyramid is

perfectly aligned with the
4 cardinal points

Below, two drawings (mid sections) compare their height:

147m

57m

In practice the Great Pyramid was almost big enough to fit the Colosseum inside it:

188m

230m
In fact, with its height of about 57m, the Colosseum is only 1/3 of the height of the Pyramid of Cheops. While
its longer side, 188m, is much less than the 230m of Cheops.
A comparison of their weight is note worthy: 7 million tonnes for the pyramid, as against 0.25 million tonnes
for the Colosseum (assuming a specific gravity of 2.5 tonnes/m3 for the travertine). The Romans were careful
about lifting blocks weighing 2, 3, 10 to 70 tonnes. Rather they limited themselves to using the “arch” system
to perfection in moving blocks, always of less than one tonne.
Below, is a drawing of a Roman crane, which was unknown to the Egyptians and in any case would have been
inadequate for lifting the 70-ton granite blocks of the so-called "King's chamber":

Fig.1: Pulled by oxen through the two large cylinders, which served as
wheels during transport (Fig. 1) and driving force during lifting. The
cylinders were large enough to accommodate a number of people,
walking within them, passing rotation to the main pivot: here the
lifting cable was fixed, and if necessary, replaced by that needed to
move the arm
A comparison of the volume of rock used is just as noteworthy: 0.1 million m³ for the Colosseum, as against
the 2.3 million m³ for the Pyramid: i.e. the pyramid has a volume about 23 times greater than that of the
Colosseum. Even a comparison of the time factor is interesting. Bearing in mind that the Pharaoh Khufu
would have reigned about 23 years in all, either from 2620-2597BC., or from 2589-2566 BC according to other
sources, and that the construction of the pyramid took place over about 20 years.
Summarize:
1) Hcolosseum = 57m; Hpyramid = 150m
2) Lcolosseum = 188m; Lpyramid = 230m
3) Wcolosseum = 0,25*106 tonne; Wpyramid = 7*106 tonne; (Wpyramid/Wcolosseum)=28
4) Vcolosseum = 0,1*106 m3; Vpyramid = 2,3*106 m3; (Vpyramid /Vcolosseum)=23
5) Tcolosseum = 8 anni; Tpyramid = 20 anni; (Tpyramid/Tcolosseum)=2,5
Height (m) Longer side (m) Weight Volume (m3) Time (years)
(tonnes)
Pyramid 150 230 7*106 2,3*106 20
Colosseum 57 188 0,25*106 0,1*106 8
Ratio 2,6 1,22 28 23 2,5
So the Pyramid weighs about 28 times as much as the Colosseum, and has a volume about 23 times greater
than it, but was built in just 20 years, so taking only 2.5 times as long as the Romans took to build the
Colosseum 2,500 years later, using technologies unknown to the Egyptians at the time of construction of the
pyramid, such as the wheel, the pulley and iron beams.
A comparison of the orders of magnitude of the comparison-factor between Weight and Volume with Time:
this element, should lead us to reflect that such a difference in the scientific analysis indicates an error in the
theory or the experiment: in this case as we are certain of the method and the time taken by the Romans to
build the Colosseum, we will immediately need to re-evaluate the theories about the construction method for
the Great Pyramid.
If you want to make a comparison, we can consider the factor of scale between the average weight and
volume ratios: both have a value of approximately 25 . Applying this to the time factor, it would mean that if
the Romans had wanted to build a Colosseum “as big as the pyramid of Cheops," they would have needed
about 200 years (25x8 = 200).
Or, conversely, if the Romans had had the same skills as the Egyptians, they should have completed the
Colosseum in less than 4 months (8x12/25 = 3,84).
By believing that the Egyptian civilization of 2500BC completed this immense task in just 20 years we attribute
to them superiority over the Roman civilization 2500 years later. Does this make the Roman engineering
efforts look ridiculous as they would have taken 200 years to complete a comparable project?
These simple comparisons, without any pretense of scientific precision, can undoubtedly give an important
indication of the orders of magnitude involved: the data on weight, volume and time may not be precise, but
their order of magnitude is irrefutable.
And a comparison of the orders of magnitude shows that we are attributing to the Egyptians a capacity for
engineering, technology and construction far superior to that of the Romans, although the latter had at their
command more advanced means and technology.
In 2570 BC (the date when it is believed that the pyramid was built) it has been shown that the Egyptians did
not know about the wheel, nor consequently the pulley. Also they did not even know about iron, only copper.
Today, in 2014, it is not technically possible to move 70-tonne granite blocks without the use of special
hydraulic-mechanical means. The hypothesis that the Egyptians "dragged" only the blocks is very dismissive,
because each block had to be moved (extracted, rotated, put into transport position, placed on the pyramid,
etc) in a complex way
We presume that the quarry from which they extracted the limestone blocks was on a hill about 1 km from the
Great Pyramid (Dr. Diego Baratono, 2007): extract, process, rotate, tilt, move on to sledges, transport to the
pyramid, then tackle the ramp, get to the specified height, position with millimeter precision blocks weighing
from 1 tonne up to 4 tons, all without the aid of even the most rudimentary pulley; this is what the Egyptians
would have done.
They did at least have the Roman crane (Fig. 1), we could get an idea of how these operations would have
occurred, it has been proved that at most the Egyptians used wooden or copper levers.
If you then move to the "King's chamber" blocks of 40 to 70 tonnes, then these tasks appear to be at the limit of
physical explanations.
By way of example, the figure below shows a diagram where the percentages of different sized blocks are
estimated:
 Fig.2 (from the magazine FOCUS): 10% of the blocks have a
weight over one tonne (for instance, the weight of a new
gasoline Fiat Panda), while only 2% exceed 20 tonnes, with
the biggest at 70 tonnes.

The third block (bottom) gives an idea of the size of the

blocks that make up the King's Chamber: note the drawing
of the man beside the block, to understand what we're
talking about.

We try briefly to illustrate the difficulty of handling a newly mined monolithic block of 50 tonnes:
1) To rotate or flip the block, nowadays using steel machinery like these:

2) To move the blocks, using cranes like these:

These machines (Eurosollevatori Pellegrini, Derrek model), however, have a maximum load capacity of 50
tonnes, and would not be suitable for the handling and processing of 70-tonne stones such as are present
within the "King's chamber".
The following drawing gives an idea of the weight that you are dealing with, we show:

Fig.3: THE TRANSPORTATION OF PERSONS BY ROAD IN ITALY (vehicles above

3.5 Tonnes). Under the rules of the Highway Code and related Regulations,
Decrees and Circulars, 3-axle buses can have a maximum mass (at full load)
of 25 tons

A 3-axle bus, fully loaded (that is 55 people + luggage + full tank of fuel) weighs about 25 tonnes: put on 3, and
this is about the weight of the granite block to be moved for miles and finally dragged along the ramp to the
height of 50m, where it is to be placed (obviously without wheels!).
When you consider the handling stones of this size, you should be aware of these assessments in order to
understand what order of magnitude we're talking about .
Therefore, without the machinery described above the Egyptians:
1 ) squared granite blocks without rotating or tilting them (or having them rotated and turned with levers )
2 ) place them on sleds for transport to the vessels placed on the Nile ;
3 )traverse curves, climbs and descents with a sled loaded with 70 tonnes ;
4) when they arrived at the Nile, move the blocks from the sled to the boat ;
5 )when they arrived at the Giza plateau, move the blocks from the boat to the sled;
6) when they arrived at the foot of the Pyramid, move the blocks onto the spiral ramps (which are internal or
external ) ;
7) having reached the expected quota , place the block with pinpoint accuracy
These questions require serious reflection, without prejudice or the wish to preserve academic theses.
Let us now consider the problem of positioning the 70-tonne blocks : an example is shown below: a picture of
a car, fitted with a crane for lifting blocks of 70 tonnes and 500 tonnes, but with less than 3m reach :

70 tonnellate 500 tonnellate

Since the blocks of 70 tons are to be moved tonne up to about 50m in height to a distance of about 115m from
the sides of the pyramid, today it is not technically possible to position this block with a mobile crane, you
need to build one dedicated to the construction site.
The diagram below shows the load bearing capacity of a mobile crane of 500 tonnes:

The graph clearly shows that the

maximum capacity of 500 tonnes is
possible only for a range of less than
3m, while at the maximum distance
of 74 meters, the crane can lift 2.9 t
only to a height of about 20m.

To meet our needs to the crane must

lift 70 tons up to 50m, with a range of
115m.

We would need a freight crane such as this:

It is a tower crane with a steel trellis, placed on a 360

degree turntable, with a tilting arm equipped with three
winches on a trolley, and with a maximum capacity of
250 tonnes. It should reach a height of 84 meters with its
arm raised, and 56 m with the arm lowered.
The images above only serve to give the reader " the pulse" of the situation and the loads in play, it is obvious
that the Egyptians did not raise the blocks but dragged them, but bear in mind that when we speak of the
"King's Chamber " we are referring to blocks 70 tonnes and the machines for handling these blocks are huge
and cannot be replaced by any number of ropes and oxen and human arms .
There are technical operations that cannot be carried out without the right equipment and this is a physical
problem that cannot be solved by increasing the number of workers or the working hours spent on the task.
By this method, archeologists use a fragile lever to support the thesis on the construction of the Great Pyramid.
Even faced with simple considerations such as those above, reason would be ready to break such a lever .
The most complete study on the subject that there is now is represented by the book " In the Construction of
the Great Pyramid" written by the architect M.V. Fiorini : I had the honor to meet and interview the architect
Fiorini and I must admit that his study and its assumptions are very convincing .
These concerns remain:

1 ) Treggia (the sledge) : the wooden sledge required for stones of 70 tonnes.
You have to test the resistance of the sledge, perhaps indicating what thickness the tracks and sleepers must be
to support such stress. Bear in mind that in addition to supporting the weight of the block, the sledge has to
withstand the stresses related to the force of the workers + oxen pulling.

2 ) Animal fat : with a view to planning the work and the time schedule for the site, you need to figure out
how many tons of animal fat are needed over 25 years, and then calculate the amount kg /day and therefore
the number of animals which must be be killed to produce that fat. You may need an improbably large
quantity.

3 ) Catamaran: transport on the Nile blocks of 70 tonnes for about 850 km.
When we consider the River Po in its entire length (from the source near Crissolo to its mouth) is about 650
km, we realize how far it is we are talking about. In addition, the assumptions that accept that travelling on the
river was possible at the time, including the need to exploit the Nile flood : thus travelling 850 km on a
catamaran made of wood (held together only by ropes made of hemp and wooden nails, because there were
no screws or metal spikes ) successfully navigating the river in flood , the bumps , the swirls , the curves, etc. .
I think it's mandatory that an expert in naval construction (preferably an expert in woodwork and even better,
an expert on ancient vessels) verifies that the engineering of the "catamaran" can support the load , and
navigate on a river in full flood, exacerbated by the boulders which slow it down (drag anchors have been
found in the bed of the Nile) .
Similarly I believe it is also obligatory to study (at least roughly) the extent to which it is possible to travel with
a load of 70 tonnes on the river route for almost 800 km. A huge distance. If in fact structural concerns emerge
from the analysis which give a strong possibility of sinking and the loss of cargo, we should be able to find a
number of huge blocks and catamarans sunk in the bed of the Nile in the stratification corresponding to 2,500
BC

4) The downward Ramp: you must also design this ramp and give more information on the size of the base,
the total volume and therefore the time taken to build it, maybe also considering the pressure of the wind and
especially the stress caused by the movement over it of the massive rocks of 70 tonnes.

5) Safety : both on the descent ramp , and on the supporting brackets .

The ramp will have come down to a height of over 40 m at the end of its construction and a width of only 5 -
6m without any safety devices at the sides : how many workers will fall merely during the transportation of
granite boulders? Was the cross-section sufficient for the passage of the oxen and of the workers in the
shooting phase?
Similarly, for the supporting brackets : working at a height of 130m from the ground without any harnesses,
pulling 800kg boulders at high altitude , should statistically cause quite a lot of the deaths.
It might be interesting to consult a Health and Safety at work expert to compare the statistics of falls on
construction sites and by analogy to derive the number of deaths on the possible construction site of the Great
Pyramid.
A last thought on the subject: If we try to reconstruct the work on the "Colosseum" today using the
construction techniques and technologies which were available to Roman engineers, perhaps using many
more years, in all likelihood we could not help but use the huge metal machines such as those described above
to achieve the goal of constructing the Great Pyramid. This means that today we do not have the necessary
technical capacity and skills to build the pyramid with the technology that we attribute to the Egyptians,
especially not within the estimated 20 year timescale .
And therefore is it logical, rational and scientifically correct to continue to believe that the Egyptian civilization
of 2500 BC with ropes, wood, cattle and manpower, was much more skilful than the first century Roman
civilization and modern civilization of the twenty-first century?
The relocation of the temple of Abu Simbel in 1965: the temple of Abu Simbel was dismantled piece by piece
and after raising the ground 65 meters above its previous level, rebuilt 180 meters further inland. The work
took five years, more than two thousand men, tonnes of material and a technological effort unprecedented in
the history of archeology.
The blocks (over 1000 of them) were numbered so as to place them back in the exact position, then were
reassembled, and the whole temple was rebuilt, even maintaining the original orientation relative to the stars
and the new course determined by the damming of the Nile at Aswan.
Here are some pictures of the operation:

This was an international level project, with the participation of the greatest powers of the twentieth century :
to move about 1000 blocks of rock (maximum weight of the blocks moved was 20 tonnes ), where they worked
24 hours a day (including at night) with cranes, trucks, wire saws , drills, steel joists, heavy machines ,
hydraulic lifters , etc. . in a race against time to prevent the flooding of the archaeological site which would be
caused by the construction of the dam.
And it is interesting to note that the human race more than 4500 years after the construction of the Great
Pyramid, has joined forces and used the latest technology to be able to move 1000 blocks in about 5 years.
Moreover, one must add that the Egyptians could not work at night, but in 1965 they worked 24 hours a day
through the use of huge arc lamps, so if they had worked only during daylight, they would have probably
spent twice as long, or about 10 years.
The comparison between the two projects is scientifically impractical for obvious reasons, but it is important to
have an indication, once again, of the order of magnitude of the comparison factors.
We try to give more value to this comparison of two such different works, alongside the operations that have
characterized briefly the two projects :
GREAT PYRAMID CONSTRUCTION RELOCATION ABU SIMBEL TEMPLE
Mining limestone blocks / granite Cut into blocks of existing works
Processing of blocks into the desired shape: almost all of Welding, clamping and locking block for arm movement
the blocks, cubic shape. toward the truck
Transportation of blocks to the pyramid with slides and Road transportation to the new site
rafts for the blocks from the quarries of Aswan
Handling and positioning in the millimeter portion of the Reassembly millimeter of the blocks in the correct
blocks sequence
Preparation of the various rooms and interior galleries Reconstruction of the temple, outside and inside,
with blocks of granite from tens of tons respecting guidelines and inclinations
Finishing slabs of white limestone Finishing with cement mortars to obscure the lines of
contact between the various blocks

The main tasks, can however find a match, albeit with due caution, in difficulty of execution, when also taking
into account the different technologies available.
, , There remain , however, two noteworthy figures, which make the comparison unfair, because they placed :
1 ) 1000 blocks in 10 years for the temple of Abu- Simbel ;
2 ) 2,300,000 blocks in 20 years for the Great Pyramid.
The relationship between the two projects is so amazing: the Egyptians have positioned 2,299,000 more stones.
Wanting to make a comparison over the same time period, in 10 years the Egyptians would have positioned
1,150,000 blocks : that is 1,149,000 more blocks .
It means that for each block cut, transported and placed in the new temple by contemporary civilization, the
Egyptian civilization could place 1500.
The ratio is 1,500 to 1 in favor of the Egyptians .
And therefore is it logical, rational and scientifically correct to continue to believe that the Egyptian
civilization of 2500 BC would have been able to make the efforts of technical and engineering of all humanity
4500 years later look ridiculous?
The three considerations above, have no value as evidence, but they are important clues to a possible
reflection: the Great Pyramid could not have been built by the Egyptians at the time of the Pharaoh Khufu,
because there were not the technical conditions or technology available to build a colossal structure of that
type in just 20 years.
As the Tolemaic geocentric system and conception of the cosmos blocked astronomical discoveries for 2000
years, we might today be victims of the same "cognitive cap" on the study of megalithic structures that fill the
earth and of which the Great Pyramid is the most significant example .

Pinerolo 06/03/2014 Simone Scotto di Carlo

Note: special thanks to Jenny Goff for the translation from Italian to English

Sources
http://www.archeoroma.com/Valle_del_Colosseo/colosseo_lesterno.htm
http://www.romanoimpero.com/2009/09/il-colosseo.html
http://www.romanoimpero.com/2009/10/strumenti-romani.html
http://www.colosseo.org/COLOSSEO/
http://www.gsr-roma.com/museo/curiosit%C3%A0/gru.htm
http://www.anticoegitto.net/piramidedicheope.htm
http://www.anticoegitto.net/abusimbel.htm
http://www.viaggioinegitto.com/abu-simbel/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBLDRf5QIC8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSqXSUSR1OU
http://www.merli-autotrasporti.it/LIEBHERR%20LTM_1500-8.1_2.pdf
http://www.sullacrestadellonda.it/monumenti/gru_maestrale.htm
http://www.pellegrini.net/cataloghi/PELLEGRINI_Eurosollevamento.pdf
http://www.antismog.org/civisonline/tpl-norme.pdf
http://www.focus.it/